4.6 Article

Cost performance and risk in the construction of offshore and onshore wind farms

期刊

WIND ENERGY
卷 20, 期 5, 页码 891-908

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/we.2069

关键词

wind energy; wind power; construction cost overrun; energy and finance

资金

  1. Research Councils United Kingdom (RCUK) [EP/K011790/1]
  2. NSF [1464383]
  3. DoE [DEE0005379]
  4. EPSRC [EP/K011790/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  5. Directorate For Engineering
  6. Div Of Chem, Bioeng, Env, & Transp Sys [1464383] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  7. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/K011790/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article investigates the risk of cost overruns and underruns occurring in the construction of 51 onshore and offshore wind farms commissioned between 2000 and 2015 in 13 countries. In total, these projects required about $39 billion in investment and reached about 11 GW of installed capacity. We use this original dataset to test six hypotheses about construction cost overruns related to (i) technological learning, (ii) fiscal control, (iii) economies of scale, (iv) configuration, (v) regulation and markets and (vi) manufacturing experience. We find that across the entire dataset, the mean cost escalation per project is 6.5% or about $63 million per windfarm, although 20 projects within the sample (39%) did not exhibit cost overruns. The majority of onshore wind farms exhibit cost underruns while for offshore wind farms the results have a larger spread. Interestingly, no significant relationship exists between the size (in total MW or per individual turbine capacity) of a windfarm and the severity of a cost overrun. Nonetheless, there is an indication that the risk increases for larger wind farms at greater distances offshore using new types of turbines and foundations. Overall, the mean cost escalation for onshore projects is 1.7% and 9.6% for offshore projects, amounts much lower than those for other energy infrastructure. Copyright (c) 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据